breached

Zedekiah was twenty years old when [he began] to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem; and the name of his mother was Hamtal, the daughter of Jeremiah, from Libnah. And he did that which was evil before the Lord, even as did Jehoiakim, and the wrath of the Lord was (i.e. fell upon) Jerusalem. And Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babel, and in the ninth year of his kingdom Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babel, came against Jerusalem, and the city was fettered with affliction (i.e. besieged) until the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. And the city was rent open (i.e. its wall was breached), and all the mighty men of war fled from the city by night by way of the plain. And the soldiers of the Chaldeans pursued the king, and they overtook him on the plain of Jericho, and all his soldiers were driven away from him; and the Chaldeans captured Zedekiah and took him up to the king of Babel at Debhlath (Riblah), and he passed judgment upon him. And the king of Babel slew the sons of Zedekiah the king before his eyes, and he blinded the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him in chains, and carried him to Babel, And Simeon the high priest, because he had freedom of speech with the commander of the [Chaldean] army, made entreaty to him, and the commander of the army gave him all the books of the Scriptures and did not burn them; and Simeon the high priest gathered them together and cast them intoa pit (or dry well). And Jerusalem was laid waste and made desolate, and no man remained therein except Jeremiah, the Prophet, who sat and raised lamentations over it for twenty years. And Jeremiah, the Prophet, died in Samaria, and the priest Ur buried him in Jerusalem, according to the oath which the prophet made him to swear.

A partition of reeds: if between one reed and another there are less than three handbreadths, [the space] through which a kid (young goat) could enter, it counts as a [legally effective] partition. A [stone] fence which has been broken through up to [the length of] ten cubits, [the breach] is [regarded] as a doorway; more than that, opposite the breach it is prohibited [to sow seeds]. If there were many breaches in the fence, if that which remains standing exceeds that which is broken through, it is permitted [to sow there]. But if the breached sections exceed those which remain standing, it is forbidden [to sow opposite the breaches.]

If a wall between two courtyards was ten handbreadths high and four handbreadths thick, two eruvin must be prepared, but not one. If there was produce on top of it, the [residents] from this side may climb up and eat and those from this side may climb up and eat, provided they do not bring it down. If the wall was breached a breach of ten cubits, the residents prepare two eruvin or, if they prefer, they prepare one eruv, because it is like a doorway. If the breach was bigger, only one eruv and not two may be prepared.

A courtyard [whose walls] were breached from two sides, and so also a house [whose walls] were breached from two of its sides, or an alley from which the cross-beam or side-post was removed: They are permitted for that Shabbat but prohibited for the future, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Yose says: if they are permitted on that Shabbat they are also permitted for the future and if they are prohibited in the future, they are also prohibited for that Shabbat.

A courtyard [whose walls] were breached from two sides, and so also a house [whose walls] were breached from two of its sides, or an alley from which the cross-beam or side-post was removed: They are permitted for that Shabbat but prohibited for the future, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Yose says: if they are permitted on that Shabbat they are also permitted for the future and if they are prohibited in the future, they are also prohibited for that Shabbat.

There were five events that happened to our ancestors on the seventeenth of Tammuz and five on the ninth of Av. On the seventeenth of Tammuz: The tablets were shattered; The tamid (daily) offering was cancelled; The [walls] of the city were breached; And Apostomos burned the Torah, and placed an idol in the Temple. On the ninth of Av It was decreed that our ancestors should not enter the land, The Temple was destroyed the first And the second time, Betar was captured, And the city was plowed up. When Av enters, they limit their rejoicing.

There we have stated: “Because the relation of the alley to courtyards is like that of a courtyard to houses.” How many courtyards must there be for an alley? Rav and Samuel both are saying, there cannot be less than two. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even one courtyard on each side. Rebbi Aha, Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan said, even a courtyard on one side and a house on the other side, a house on one side and a store on the other side. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob (asked) [in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan]: An alley cannot have less than two courtyards, a courtyard cannot have less than two houses. An alley whose length and width are equal is not permitted by lath or beam but by planks like a courtyard. Samuel asked Rav, by how much must its length exceed its width? He told him, anything. The dwellers of the Land of Israel make theirs square. If five alleys open into one alley. Whether what is standing is more than what is breached or what is breached is more than what is standing, it does not need a beam, if they are distant four cubits.

There we have stated: “Because the relation of the alley to courtyards is like that of a courtyard to houses.” How many courtyards must there be for an alley? Rav and Samuel both are saying, there cannot be less than two. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even one courtyard on each side. Rebbi Aha, Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan said, even a courtyard on one side and a house on the other side, a house on one side and a store on the other side. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob (asked) [in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan]: An alley cannot have less than two courtyards, a courtyard cannot have less than two houses. An alley whose length and width are equal is not permitted by lath or beam but by planks like a courtyard. Samuel asked Rav, by how much must its length exceed its width? He told him, anything. The dwellers of the Land of Israel make theirs square. If five alleys open into one alley. Whether what is standing is more than what is breached or what is breached is more than what is standing, it does not need a beam, if they are distant four cubits.

HALAKHAH: “One makes planks for wells,” etc. Since what is breached is more than what is standing he makes double columns but not simple ones, which proves by itself that it is because of access to the well. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: You are reaching here what are the limits of domains of the Sabbath, for if he did so at (one) place and then threw there four cubits in the public domain he would be liable. Rebbi Yose said, since you were lenient with him about what is breached may be more than what is standing, you are strict with him in another matter since everywhere else one makes a plank of four hand-breadths but here he makes a plank of six hand-breadths.

HALAKHAH: “One makes planks for wells,” etc. Since what is breached is more than what is standing he makes double columns but not simple ones, which proves by itself that it is because of access to the well. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: You are reaching here what are the limits of domains of the Sabbath, for if he did so at (one) place and then threw there four cubits in the public domain he would be liable. Rebbi Yose said, since you were lenient with him about what is breached may be more than what is standing, you are strict with him in another matter since everywhere else one makes a plank of four hand-breadths but here he makes a plank of six hand-breadths.

They wanted to say that Rebbi Meïr would admit to Rebbi Jehudah, Rebbi Jehudah will not admit to Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Meïr will admit to Rebbi Jehudah? Does not Rebbi Meïr have simple poles, and you are saying so? If you are making double columns but no straight poles, he would think, perhaps a partition for the Sabbath is made in this way; he would make it in other places and become liable. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: Neither of them yields to the other. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose (about) did not say this, he said something similar. Rebbi Bun and Rebbi Bun asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: How far away does a double column have to be so it would not need a straight [plank]? He told him, less than three [hand-breadths] is considered closed, more than six is far away. Therefore we have to consider from three to four. If you would say that Rebbi Meïr yields to Rebbi Jehudah, should he not make a double column far away and not need a simple [plank]? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, Rebbi Meïr requires simple [planks] only according to Rebbi Jehudah’s method. Rebbi Yose said, even according to his own method, since in any case what is standing is not more than what is breached. Since what is standing should be more than what is breached it needs a simple [plank].

They wanted to say that Rebbi Meïr would admit to Rebbi Jehudah, Rebbi Jehudah will not admit to Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Meïr will admit to Rebbi Jehudah? Does not Rebbi Meïr have simple poles, and you are saying so? If you are making double columns but no straight poles, he would think, perhaps a partition for the Sabbath is made in this way; he would make it in other places and become liable. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ḥinena: Neither of them yields to the other. Rebbi Mana said, even though Rebbi Yose (about) did not say this, he said something similar. Rebbi Bun and Rebbi Bun asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: How far away does a double column have to be so it would not need a straight [plank]? He told him, less than three [hand-breadths] is considered closed, more than six is far away. Therefore we have to consider from three to four. If you would say that Rebbi Meïr yields to Rebbi Jehudah, should he not make a double column far away and not need a simple [plank]? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, Rebbi Meïr requires simple [planks] only according to Rebbi Jehudah’s method. Rebbi Yose said, even according to his own method, since in any case what is standing is not more than what is breached. Since what is standing should be more than what is breached it needs a simple [plank].

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah says, up to two bet se’ah,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the argument of Rebbi Jehudah is inverted, as we have stated there: “And similarly one carries under panelled bridges on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages forbid it”. Rebbi Eleazar said, it is not inverted. Rebbi Jeremiah said, for he is of Rav Jehudah’s opinion, as Rav Jehudah said, that is if it is open to a domain of difficult access. But if it was open to the public domain it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose said, everywhere Rebbi Eleazar seeks support from the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, how does one permit public domain? Rebbi Jehudah says, a lath on each side or a beam at each side but the Sages say a lath and a beam on one side and he shall make a door frame on the other side. And here he says so? Here about ten [cubits], there about thirteen. The words of the rabbis disagree. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rav Hoshaia asked my father, how large can the breach of an alley be in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah? And he told him, thirteen [cubits]. And here he says so? The Rabbis of Caesarea say, there what is standing is more than what is breached but here what is breached is more than what is standing.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Rebbi Jehudah says, up to two bet se’ah,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the argument of Rebbi Jehudah is inverted, as we have stated there: “And similarly one carries under panelled bridges on the Sabbath, the words of Rebbi Jehudah, but the Sages forbid it”. Rebbi Eleazar said, it is not inverted. Rebbi Jeremiah said, for he is of Rav Jehudah’s opinion, as Rav Jehudah said, that is if it is open to a domain of difficult access. But if it was open to the public domain it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose said, everywhere Rebbi Eleazar seeks support from the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, how does one permit public domain? Rebbi Jehudah says, a lath on each side or a beam at each side but the Sages say a lath and a beam on one side and he shall make a door frame on the other side. And here he says so? Here about ten [cubits], there about thirteen. The words of the rabbis disagree. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rav Hoshaia asked my father, how large can the breach of an alley be in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah? And he told him, thirteen [cubits]. And here he says so? The Rabbis of Caesarea say, there what is standing is more than what is breached but here what is breached is more than what is standing.

A corral which covers up to two bet se’ah. Rebbi Abbahu said, since it can be permitted by a caravan, if somebody threw from the public domain into it he is liable. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac asked, (not after it was permitted) [if it was chosen by] the caravan it becomes forbidden in a prohibition; therefore here is no liability for a purification sacrifice. By the same argument, an alley whose beam is higher than twenty cubits since it is qualified in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah (more than thirteen), if somebody threw from the public domain into it would he be liable? An alley which was breached more than ten [cubits], since a breach of an alley in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah is more than thirteen, if somebody threw from the public domain into it would he be liable?

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Once they only entered the port,” etc. Rabban Gamliel had a telescope where he could estimate with his eyes in the plane. And why before nightfall? Even after nightfall; is this not Rabban Gamliel’s? Explain it if the port was larger than two bet se’ah, or the walls were not ten [hand-breadths] high but were not open wider than ten [cubits] nor what was standing was opposite what was standing and what was breached opposite the breached.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Once they only entered the port,” etc. Rabban Gamliel had a telescope where he could estimate with his eyes in the plane. And why before nightfall? Even after nightfall; is this not Rabban Gamliel’s? Explain it if the port was larger than two bet se’ah, or the walls were not ten [hand-breadths] high but were not open wider than ten [cubits] nor what was standing was opposite what was standing and what was breached opposite the breached.

It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: “Also its ledges and walls were measured with it.” Rav Hoshaia asked: is the airspace of a courtyard measured with it? Let us hear from the following: A house which was breached on one side is measured with it, from two sides it is not measured with it. Rebbi Abbin in the name of Rav Jehudah, if its beam had been removed. But if its beam had not been removed it is measured with it. If the beam had been removed is it not like the airspace of a courtyard? There it was enclosed as a dwelling, here it was not enclosed as a dwelling. “If he measures he should not be measuring from the center since he would lose, but from the corners.”

HALAKHAH: “If a large roof is adjacent to a small one, the large one is permitted but the small forbidden.” Our Mishnah [refers to] one roof only, but on another roof it is forbidden. If it is not level, but if it is level it is permitted. Our Mishnah disagrees with Samuel: “If a large courtyard is open to a small one, the large one is permitted but the small forbidden.” Should one not be able to move there up to the place of the partitions? The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Aḥiyya: What Samuel said, on this Sabbath itself, what the Mishnah deals with the next Sabbath. Where do we hold? If they made one eruv together, they should be permitted both on this and on the next Sabbath. If they did not make any eruv, they should be forbidden both on this and on the next Sabbath. The case happened as it happened. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said before Rebbi La: When each of them made separate eruvin, nevertheless the large one is permitted since it is breached along its entire length and the small one is forbidden since it was not breached along its entire length.

HALAKHAH: “If a large roof is adjacent to a small one, the large one is permitted but the small forbidden.” Our Mishnah [refers to] one roof only, but on another roof it is forbidden. If it is not level, but if it is level it is permitted. Our Mishnah disagrees with Samuel: “If a large courtyard is open to a small one, the large one is permitted but the small forbidden.” Should one not be able to move there up to the place of the partitions? The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Aḥiyya: What Samuel said, on this Sabbath itself, what the Mishnah deals with the next Sabbath. Where do we hold? If they made one eruv together, they should be permitted both on this and on the next Sabbath. If they did not make any eruv, they should be forbidden both on this and on the next Sabbath. The case happened as it happened. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said before Rebbi La: When each of them made separate eruvin, nevertheless the large one is permitted since it is breached along its entire length and the small one is forbidden since it was not breached along its entire length.

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. Why do I need “on both sides”? Even on one side! Does this not follow Rav, as Rav said, a courtyard becomes permitted by two planks? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: It is a disagreement. He who says there by one plank, here also by one plank; he who says there by two planks, here also by two planks. If it became breached in the middle it is permitted; Samuel said it is forbidden. Rebbi Zeˋira said, if that of Samuel is not what he learned, it is difficult. If one entire side was breached? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is [the case of] the porch; if it were a porch, would it not be permitted?

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. Why do I need “on both sides”? Even on one side! Does this not follow Rav, as Rav said, a courtyard becomes permitted by two planks? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: It is a disagreement. He who says there by one plank, here also by one plank; he who says there by two planks, here also by two planks. If it became breached in the middle it is permitted; Samuel said it is forbidden. Rebbi Zeˋira said, if that of Samuel is not what he learned, it is difficult. If one entire side was breached? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is [the case of] the porch; if it were a porch, would it not be permitted?

HALAKHAH: Only it should be no larger than two bet se’ah, or the walls ten [hand-breadths] high, nor the opening wider than ten [cubits], nor what was standing was opposite what was standing and what was breached opposite the breached.

HALAKHAH: Only it should be no larger than two bet se’ah, or the walls ten [hand-breadths] high, nor the opening wider than ten [cubits], nor what was standing was opposite what was standing and what was breached opposite the breached.

HALAKHAH: The Mishnah is Abba Yose ben Ḥanin’s, since Abba Yose ben Ḥanin said, corresponding to the thirteen gates. But according to the Rabbis there were seven gates. In the Rabbis’ opinion, where were the thirteen prostrations? As we have stated there, “There were thirteen breaches, were the Greek kings breached it; they came back and closed them and decided correspondingly thirteen prostrations.”

MISHNAH: Five things happened to our forefathers on the Seventeenth of Tammuz and five on the Ninth of Av. On the Seventeenth of Tammuz were the tablets broken, the daily sacrifice ceased, the city was breached, Apostomos burned the Torah, and put up an idol in the Temple. On the Ninth of Av was decided that our forefathers would not enter the Land, the Temple was destroyed the first and second times, Betar was taken, and the city ploughed over.

Rebbi Simeon ben Yohai stated: So was my teacher Aqiba explaining. So says the Eternal of Hosts, the fast of the fourth, the fast of the fifth, the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth will be for the House of Israel enjoyment and joy. The fast of the fourth is the Seventeenth of Tammuz, the day when the tablets were broken, the daily sacrifice ceased, the city was breached, Apostomos burned the Torah, and put an idol in the Temple. The fast of the fifth is the Ninth of Av, when the Temple was destroyed the first and the second times. The fast of the seventh is the third of Tishre, when Gedalya ben Aḥiqam was murdered. The fast of the tenth is the Tenth of Tevet, the day when the King of Babylonia closed in on Jerusalem.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated: So was my teacher Aqiba explaining. So says the Eternal of Hosts, the fast of the fourth, the fast of the fifth, the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth will be for the House of Israel enjoyment and joy. The fast of the fourth is the Seventeenth of Tammuz, the day when the tablets were broken, the daily sacrifice ceased, the city was breached, Apostomos burned the Torah, and put an idol in the Temple. The fast of the fifth is the Ninth of Av, when the Temple was destroyed the first and the second times. The fast of the seventh is the third of Tishre, when Gedalya ben Aḥiqam was murdered. The fast of the tenth is the Tenth of Tevet, the day when the King of Babylonia closed in on Jerusalem. That is what is written, the Eternal’s word came to me in the ninth year, in the tenth month, on the tenth of the month, saying: Son of man, write down the name of this day. On this very day the king of Babylonia closed in on Jerusalem. But I am saying that the fast of the tenth is the Fifth of Tevet, the day when the news came to the diaspora. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year of our exile, in the fifth, on the fifth of the month, the fugitive came to me from Jerusalem, saying, the city was breached. Only that in Judea one fasts on the act, and in the exile on the news. Rebbi Aqiba explains the first last and the last first; but I am explaining the first first and the last last; and I hold my words more intelligible than Rebbi Aqiba’s words.

Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated: So was my teacher Aqiba explaining. So says the Eternal of Hosts, the fast of the fourth, the fast of the fifth, the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth will be for the House of Israel enjoyment and joy. The fast of the fourth is the Seventeenth of Tammuz, the day when the tablets were broken, the daily sacrifice ceased, the city was breached, Apostomos burned the Torah, and put an idol in the Temple. The fast of the fifth is the Ninth of Av, when the Temple was destroyed the first and the second times. The fast of the seventh is the third of Tishre, when Gedalya ben Aḥiqam was murdered. The fast of the tenth is the Tenth of Tevet, the day when the King of Babylonia closed in on Jerusalem. That is what is written, the Eternal’s word came to me in the ninth year, in the tenth month, on the tenth of the month, saying: Son of man, write down the name of this day. On this very day the king of Babylonia closed in on Jerusalem. But I am saying that the fast of the tenth is the Fifth of Tevet, the day when the news came to the diaspora. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year of our exile, in the fifth, on the fifth of the month, the fugitive came to me from Jerusalem, saying, the city was breached. Only that in Judea one fasts on the act, and in the exile on the news. Rebbi Aqiba explains the first last and the last first; but I am explaining the first first and the last last; and I hold my words more intelligible than Rebbi Aqiba’s words.

So far if [the corral] was fenced in on four sides. If it was fenced in on three sides and breached on one side, and [an animal] left through the breach, what is the rule? Let us hear from the following: “If his wall fell in from the noise of earthquakes or thunder and he rebuilt it as required, he is not liable, otherwise he is liable.” The only problem is if three better built walls fell together with it.

A wall between two partitions which was breached. Rav and Samuel, one said, half belongs to one party, the other half to the other party. The other said, both own it entirely. What is the difference between them? If one found a find. For him who said that half belongs to one party, the other half to the other party, if it was on one side it belongs to this party, one the other side it belongs to the other party. For him who said that both own it entirely, the finder acquired it.

HALAKHAH: “If the Court ruled but one of them knew that it was in error,” etc. The Mishnah is Rebbi’s, since Rebbi said, no one invalidates but the distinguished member of the Court (at Lydda) [only]. It is written: If from the eyes of the congregation, from him who is appointed as eyes of the congregation. It is written, they shall stand there with you. Just as you are neither proselyte, nor Gibeonite, nor a bastard. Proselytes are reasonable, but bastards? does the court appoints bastards? Rav Ḥuna said, when they breached the rules and appointed. Rebbi Ḥanania, Rebbi Mana. One said, as part of the Seventy; the other said, apart from the Seventy. He who said, apart from the Seventy, is understandable. But he who said, as part of the Seventy, therefore not apart from the Seventy? Since he is not suitable for ordination, he is considered like a stone.

HALAKHAH: “If they sinned before being appointed,” etc. The colleagues say that the reason of Rebbi Simeon is because greatness atones. Rebbi Yose said, because his sin and his knowledge are not equal. What is the difference between them? Referring to the beginning of the Chapter: “An Anointed Priest who sinned and then was removed from his anointed status, or a Prince who sinned and then was removed from his exalted status. The Anointed Priest brings a bull and the Prince brings a goat;” if there is any doubt whether they sinned. He who said, because greatness atones; just as it atones for the certain [sin] so it atones for the doubt. He who said. because his sin and his knowledge are not equal; his sin and his knowledge are not equal. If they sinned before they were appointed and after they were appointed they breached, for him who said, because greatness atones, greatness atoned for the first, but he is liable for the second and the third. For him who said, because his sin and his knowledge are not equal. If they sinned regarding hearing a sound, or expression of the lips, or the impurity of the Temple and its sancta, for him who said, because his sin and his knowledge are not equal, here his sin and his knowledge are equal. For him who said, because greatness atones, even in this case greatness atones.

R. Judah b. Ila'i expounded: If [the roof of] a house is breached, and he placed skhakh over it, it is valid. R. Ishmael son of R. Jose said to him Master, explain [your words]. Thus my father explained it: If there are four cubits it is invalid, if less than four cubits, it is valid.